Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.19 seconds)Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The National Highways Act, 1956
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 34 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Harvinder Kaur And Anr. vs Godha Ram And Anr. on 24 August, 1978
In Harvinder Kaur vs.
Godha Ram, ILR 1979 (1) Punjab & Haryana 147: AIR 1979 Punjab &
Haryana 76 this Court held that no revision would lie against an order
passed under Order 26 Rule 9 of the Code.
The Right To Fair Compensation And Transparency In Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
Sumer Chand Jain vs Vishnu Bhagwan Mangla on 20 February, 2006
Post-amendment to Section
115 CPC the principle has been developed under Article 227 of the
Constitution in, among other precedents, Sumer Chand Jain vs. Vishnu
Bhagwan Mangla, 2006 (2) RCR (Civil) 445 while relying on Godha
Ram and Pritam Singh & Ors vs. Sunder Lal & Ors, (DB): 1990 (2) PLR
191 wherein this Court held as follows:-
Hari Om vs Minish Kumar on 13 January, 2005
In this regard, in Hari Om v.
Minish Kumar (2005-2) PLR 690, it was observed by
this Court that if a revision petition under Section 115
C.P.C. against the impugned order is not maintainable,
then by mere change in the head note of the petition, the
substance cannot be replaced to wriggle out from the
rigors of law which is well settled that no revision
petition under Section 115 C.P.C is maintainable."